Caroline Glick explains why there are no ‘lone wolf’ killers in Islam | Kajunman's Blog

************* WARNING **************
VERY GRAPHIC PICTURESBUT SOMETIMES THE TRUTH IS A HARD PILL TO SWALLOW 

» Caroline Glick explains why there are no ‘lone wolf’ killers in Islam Bare Naked Islam.
[Re-posted from Bare Naked Islam]

Caroline Glick explains why there are no ‘lone wolf’ killers in Islam

The massacre of Jewish children at the Ozar Hatorah Jewish day school in Toulouse was decried by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and all of France. World leaders condemned the crime. The killer died in a standoff with French security forces. Justice was served. Or so you thought.

FRENCH JEWISH SCHOOL MURDERS BY A MUSLIM

Caroline GlickDig a little deeper and it becomes clear that justice has not been served. Indeed, it hasn’t even begun to be addressed. The killer, Mohamed Merah, was NOT a lone gunman. He wasn’t even one of the lone jihadists we hear so much about. He had plenty of accomplices. And not all of them were Muslims.

Mohammed Merah

An analysis of the nature of his crime and the identity of his many accomplices must necessarily begin with a question. Why did Merah videotape his crime? 

Why did he take the trouble of strapping a video camera to his neck and filming himself chasing eight-year-old Miriam Monsonego through the school courtyard and shooting her three times in the head? Why did he document his execution of Rabbi Jonathan Sandler and his two little boys, three-year-old Gavriel and six-year-old Aryeh? 

 The first answer is because Merah took pride in killing Jewish children. Beyond that, he was certain that millions of people would be heartened by his crime. By watching him shoot the life out of Jewish children, they would be inspired to repeat his actions elsewhere. And he was surely correct.

Millions of people have watched the 2002 video of Daniel Pearl being decapitated. Similar decapitation videos of Western hostages in Iraq and elsewhere have also become runaway Internet sensations.  

DANIEL PEARL BEHEADED BY KHALID SHEIK MOHAMMED

Led by Youssef Fofana, the Muslim gang in France that kidnapped and tortured Ilan Halimi to death in 2006 also took pictures of their handiwork. Their photographs were clearly imitations of the photos that Pearl’s killers took of him before they chopped his head off.

The pride that jihadist murderers take in their crimes is not merely manifested in their camera work. US Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who massacred 13 US servicemen at Fort Hood in 2009, showed obvious pride in his dedication to jihad. Hassan gave a presentation to his colleagues justifying jihad. He carried business cards in which he identified himself as an “SOA,” a soldier of Allah.

Similarly, Naveed Haq, the American Muslim who carried out the attack at the Seattle Jewish Federation building in 2006, murdering one woman and wounding another five, bragged to his mother and friend about his crime in monitored telephone calls from jail. Haq boasted that he was “a jihadi” and that his victims deserved to die because they were “Israeli collaborators.”

The exhibitionism common to all the men’s behavior makes it obvious that that their attacks were not the random actions of isolated crazy people or lone extremists. All of these killers were certain that they were part of a global movement that seeks the annihilation of the Jews, the subjugation of the Western world and the supremacy of jihadist Islam. And they were convinced that their actions served the interests of this movement and that they would be viewed as heroes by millions of their fellow Muslims for their killing of innocents.

THIS SITUATION is bad enough on its own. But what make it truly dangerous are the West’s responses to it. Those responses together with the crimes themselves expose the depraved and perilous nature of our times. And they show that Merah’s death can bring no closure to this story. There are five interrelated aspects to the West’s response to these crimes and the jihadist reality they expose.

The first aspect of the West’s response is denial. Time after time, Merah and his ilk throughout the Western world show us who they are and what they want. And time after time, the Western elites, and even much of the Jewish leadership, turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to their cries of murder and calls for the destruction of Western civilization.

In the case of Halimi’s murder, for instance, Paris police refused to view his abduction as a hate crime. Despite the fact that Fofana and 
his followers called Halimi’s family and recited Koranic verses while Ilan screamed out in agony in the background, the Paris police treated his disappearance as a garden variety kidnap-for-ransom case. Even after Ilan was found naked at a rail heading with burns on more than 80 percent of his body and died en route to the hospital, it took French authorities over a week to admit that he had been the victim of an anti-Semitic crime.

 On a lesser note, everyone from the media to Jewish communal leaders in the US abjectly refuse to recognize that mainstream Muslim groups like the Muslim Students Association are sympathetically inclined towards Hamas. Moreover, they refuse to recognize that sympathy for Hamas necessarily entails sympathy for Hamas’s genocidal platform of annihilating the Jewish people in the name of jihad.

As David Horowitz wrote in a recent article at FrontPage magazine, Jewish student leaders at places such as the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill prefer to attack messengers like himself, than accept the inconvenient truth that Muslim student leaders on campus with them support the annihilation of Israel.

 Ignoring and denying the openly expressed aims of jihadists like Merah is of course only part of the problem. The second aspect of the West’s effective collusion with these killers is Western elites’ justification of their crimes. After initially pinning the blame for the Toulouse massacre on Nazis, when French authorities finally acknowledged Merah’s jihadist identity, they also provided his justification for murder. Speaking to reporters, French Interior Minister Claude Gueant gave us Merah’s name and his excuse at the same time.

Gueant told us that Merah was associated with al-Qaida and he was upset about what he referred to as Israel’s “murder” of Palestinian children. It should be unnecessary to note the simple truth that Israel doesn’t murder Palestinian children. Palestinians murder Israeli children. But then, if Merah got his news from the Western media there is a reasonable chance that he wouldn’t know that.

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton was rightly condemned by Israeli political leaders this week for her equation of the actual massacre of Jewish children in Toulouse with the imaginary massacre of Palestinian children in Gaza. But she is not alone in this behavior. US President Barack Obama engaged in similarly outrageous libels when during his speech to the Muslim world in June 2009 he compared the Holocaust with Israeli treatment of the Palestinians. And the line separating these libels from actual incitement is often hard to find.

 French television, which Merah no doubt often watched, is notorious for crossing it. It was France 2 that gave us this century’s first anti-Semitic blood libel with its October 2000 tale of Muhammad al-Dura’s alleged death at the hands of IDF soldiers. The France 2 story was exposed as a fraud by an appellate court in Paris in 2008. The appellate court overturned a lower court’s libel ruling against Internet activist Philippe Karsenty who wrote on his personal website that the al-Dura story was a hoax.

 The appellate court viewed France 2′s unedited footage from the scene. That footage showed al-Dura moving after the France 2 cameraman had declared him dead. The footage led the court to overturn the decision of the lower court that had found Karsenty guilty of libel.

Apparently the same French establishment that now declares solidarity with France’s Jews is unwilling to part with the al-Dura hoax that incited the spilling of so much Jewish blood in the past decade. Last month, France’s Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling and ordered it to retry the case. As far as the Supreme Court of France is concerned, the appellate court had no right to ask France 2 to provide evidence that its story was true. According to the court, the unedited footage which proved the story was a blood libel should never have been admitted as evidence. The truth should never have been permitted to come to light.

IN ADDITION to denying, justifying and inciting jihadist violence, Western elites and authorities also engage in facilitating it and, after the fact, excusing it. In the case of Merah, although details are still unclear, it has been reported that he underwent jihadist training by al-Qaida in Afghanistan and was apprehended by Afghan authorities.

 Despite his ties to al-Qaida, either US or French military authorities decided he should be sent back to France even though he clearly constituted a danger to French society. Moreover, according to media reports, French authorities knew that he was dangerous and still failed to apprehend him. They had been informed that at least on one occasion, Merah sought to radicalize a 15-year-old Muslim boy. And yet, he was allowed to remain at large.

As the mother of the teenager said, “All these people had to die before they finally arrest Mohamed Merah. What an enormous waste. The police knew this individual was dangerous and radicalized. I complained to the police twice about Mohamed Merah and tried to follow up several times.”

 In the US, Major Hasan’s colleagues and commanders knew of his sympathy for jihad and his connections to jihadist leader Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. And yet they promoted him to major and sent him to Fort Hood.

 The West’s complicity with these jihadist crimes doesn’t end with their perpetration.

 After failing to acknowledge that Halimi was abducted by jihadists who murdered him because he was a Jew, French authorities conducted his murderers’ trials behind closed doors. Hidden from public scrutiny, in their first trial, Halimi’s killers were given pitifully lights sentences. Fofana was rendered eligible for parole within 22 years. It was only the outcry of activists within the French Jewish community that caused French authorities to hold a retrial.

 In Seattle, Haq’s first trial for his attack on Seattle’s Jewish Federation was declared a mistrial. Seattle’s mayor and media went out of their way to present Haq as mentally ill. The prosecution failed to seek the death penalty and didn’t bother to present the records of Haq’s phone conversations bragging about his crimes until his second trial.

Together, the behavior of proud jihadist warriors of the West like Merah, Hasan, Haq and Fofana, and the depraved silence, indifference and complicity of Western elites with their jihadist aims, form the physical and moral landscape of our time. And it is because of this evil mix of perpetrators and enablers that Merah’s death is not a victory of justice.

Related articles

• Caroline Glick :: Harvard, Jew haters, motherhood and Israel(genomega1.wordpress.com)
• French Jew Killing Jihadist Posted Video of the Cold Blooded Murder of Little Jewish Girl (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
• France: Teacher urges compassion for killer Merah’s unhappy childhood (twitchy.com)
• Islam’s Latest Contributions to Peace (paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com)

Eric Holder | Gun Control | Operation Fast and Furious

Eric Holder | Gun Control | Operation Fast and Furious | The Daily Caller
Attorney General Eric Holder Appeared On C-span On January 30, 1995 To Talk About Gun Control Strategies Attorney General Eric Holder Supported Using Hollywood, The Media And Government Officials In Order To “Really Brainwash People” Into Opposing Firearm Ownership, According To A 1995 C-span Video That Emerged Sunday Online.

Holder, Who Was Then The U.s. Attorney For The District Of Columbia, Was Addressing The Women’s National Democratic Club On Jan. 30, 1995. In His Speech, He Held Up Anti-smoking Campaigns As A Model For An Anti-gun Campaign.

“What We Need To Do Is Change The Way In Which People Think About Guns, Especially Young People, And Make It Something That’s Not Cool, That It’s Not Acceptable, It’s Not Hip To Carry A Gun Anymore, In The Way In Which We’ve Changed Our Attitudes About Cigarettes,” Holder Said.

Video Of The Speech Was Discovered By Breitbart.com.

Holder Explained That He Wanted To Use Influential Figures Like Then-washington, D.c. Marion Barry And The Rev. Jesse Jackson, As Well As Widely Watched Tv Shows Like “The Fresh Prince Of Bel Air” And “Martin,” To Forward His Anti-gun Campaign. He Sought To Push That Same Agenda Through Public Schools As Well, “Every Day, Every School, At Every Level.”

Holder Said These Resources Would Be The Driving Force Behind A Campaign To “Really Brainwash People Into Thinking About Guns In A Vastly Different Way.”

It’s Unclear Whether Holder Still Seeks To “Brainwash” Americans Into Opposing Gun Ownership. Department Of Justice Spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler Did Not Return The Daily Caller’s Request For Comment On The Matter.

The White House Also Did Not Return Thedc’s Request For Comment About Whether President Obama Agrees With Holder’s 1995 Remarks.

The Revelation That Holder Wanted To “Brainwash” People Into Being “Anti-gun” Appears To Be Supported By What Congress And The American People Have Learned About Operation Fast And Furious.

In Fast And Furious, The Obama Administration’s Bureau Of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms And Explosives – In A Program Overseen By Holder’s Department Of Justice – Sent About 2,000 Guns South To Mexican Drug Cartels. The Obama Administration Did This Via “Straw Purchasers” Who Bought Guns In The United States With The Intention Of Illegally Trafficking Them Somewhere Else.

Some Have Charged That Obama Administration Officials, Including Holder, Implemented Fast And Furious As Part Of A Strategy To Generate Anti-gun Outrage Among The U.s. Population.

In A July 2010 Email That Surfaced In A Congressional Investigation, Atf Assistant Director Mark Chait Asked Bill Newell, His Agency’s Lead Agent In Phoenix To “See If These Guns Were All Purchased From The Same [Dealer] And At One Time. We Are Looking At Anecdotal Cases To Support A Demand Letter On Long Gun Multiple Sales.”

Statistics Collected From The Program Eventually Formed The Backbone Of That New Long-gun Reporting Rule, Which The Administration Implemented After Fast And Furious Became A National Scandal.

The Rule Was Upheld In A January Ruling From The U.s. District Court For The District Of Columbia.

Also Supporting Allegations That Fast And Furious Was A Gun-control Stalking Horse Are Comments Made By California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein During A November 2011 Hearing.

“My Concern, Mr. Chairman, Is There’s Been A Lot Said About Fast And Furious, And Perhaps Mistakes Were Made, But I Think This Hunt For Blame Doesn’t Really Speak About The Problem,” Feinstein Said.

“And The Problem Is, Anybody Can Walk In And Buy Anything, .50-Caliber Weapons, Sniper Weapons, Buy Them In Large Amounts, And Send Them Down To Mexico. So, The Question Really Becomes, What Do We Do About This?”

In His Own Written Testimony In November, Holder Complained That Congress “Voted To Keep Law Enforcement In The Dark When Individuals Purchase Multiple Semi-automatic Rifles And Shotguns In Southwest Border Gun Shops.”

And On Sunday Another Sign Of Holder’s Anti-gun Advocacy Surfaced When The Blog The Right Scoop Published Excerpts From A Washington Post Op-ed Holder Wrote Shortly After 9/11, In Which He Used The Terrorist Attacks As A Rationale To Push For More Gun Control Laws.

South Carolina Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy Told Thedc In February That He Was Prepared, But Had No Opportunity, “To Prove To The Attorney General — Which He Already Knows — That There Are Plenty Of Gun Laws On The Books Right Now … The Notion That The Fix Is: ‘We Just Got To Get Congress To Pass More Gun Laws’ Is Just Sheer Sophistry. And I Could Have Proven That.”

Obama: Iran Has Nuclear Rights; I Did Not Want to Sanction Its Bank | Kajunman's Blog

Obama: Iran Has Nuclear Rights; I Did Not Want to Sanction Its Bank | Kajunman's Blog

Obama: Iran Has Nuclear Rights; I Did Not Want to Sanction Its Bank

Posted on January 23, 2012

From PJ Media comes this bit of info on just how ‘hard’ Obama is on the Iranian Nuclear problems.

A man of fierce backbone… never bending… never swaying… never giving in. That’s our President…. OOOPPSSS sorry, was feeling light headed for a moment. This lily-livered-wet-noodle-for-a-spine couldn’t lead a group of girl scouts to a cookie sell.

So he talks big to us and back-doors Iran with a whole different story. Of course from what I’ve read back-dooring isn’t anything new to him. But that’s another story for another day. Yep, it seems Obama has tried to convince some of the people in the USA that he is standing strong against those Iranians. Yeah, he’s told the Iranians he would join the sanctions on Iran and bring them to their knees, if they continued with their development of their nuclear capabilities. And for them to not even think about closing down the Strait of Hormuz. Yep, a really tuff cookie, is our Prez. NOT!!!

Read the article below and get all the details of how he’s two-faced and liar-in-chief.

Thanks to REZA KAHLILI at PJ Media for the article: [Emphasis Mine]

PJ Media » Obama: Iran Has Nuclear Rights; I Did Not Want to Sanction Its Bank.

Obama: Iran Has Nuclear Rights; I Did Not Want to Sanction Its Bank

Soft power.

by Reza Kahlili

January 23, 2012 – 12:09 am

The threat by the Islamic regime in Iran to close down the Strait of Hormuz and of Revolutionary Guards Navy boats harassing U.S. Navy ships in the Persian Gulf has caused President Obama to send secret messages to the regime stating his concerns over the closure of the strait and the possibility of an accidental war.

Since then, Iranian officials have been revealing the contents of President Obama’s letter to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which

Image via Wikipedia

indicates a deep desire by the U.S. president for a dialogue with the radical leaders of Iran. However, on Saturday,Iranian officials also claimed that an oral message by Obama delivered through the Swiss ambassador in Tehran is even more revealing than the letter delivered to the Iranian supreme leader.

According to Fars News Agency, which is close to the Revolutionary Guards, Hossein Ebrahimi, the vice chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, alleged that on Saturday in a meeting between Swiss Ambassador Livia Leu Agosti and Iranian Foreign Ministry officials, Agosti informed the Iranian officials that Obama recognizes Iran’s right of access to and use of nuclear technology.

Ebarhimi also disclosed another important point that the Swiss diplomat delivered: Obama said that “I didn’t want to impose sanctions on your central bank, but I had no options but to approve it since a Congress majority had approved the decision.”

Last month, the Obama administration pressed key Democrats on the defense bill conference committee to get their colleagues to water down the strong sanctions language against Iran, which passed the Senate by a 100-0 vote as part of the fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill. The administration, threatening a veto,managed to delay the implementation of sanctions and penalties from 60 to 180 days in the final draft, also allowing the president to waive those penalties for national security reasons or if it would harm the global economy.

President Obama boasted on Thursday that U.S.-led sanctions had reduced Iran’s economy to a “shambles,” defending his policy towards Iran following sharp Republican attacks.

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast also disclosed on Saturday that Iran had received Obama’s message through three different channels: U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice handed a letter to her Iranian counterpart, the Swiss ambassador conveyed the same message in Tehran, while Iraqi President Jalal Talabani delivered the same message to Iranian officials in Baghdad.

Last Wednesday, Ebrahimi for the first time disclosed the contents of Obama’s letter in which the U.S. president had mentioned that cooperation and negotiation are based on the mutual interests of the two countries, and assured Iran that America will not take any action against the Islamic regime.

This is not the first letter sent to the leaders of Iran by Obama, Ebrahimi said. “He has repeatedly spoken in a soft tone about the Islamic Republic of Iran, but in practice, he has not acted accordingly.”

In response to Obama’s message to the leaders of the Islamic regime and his request for negotiations, Iranian officials have decided to reveal his message in order to further embarrass him on the international scene, claiming that Obama’s approach shows the world the true power of the Islamic regime.

So there we have it. Trying to make out he’s the Superman to the Americans but all the while, just a pussy-cat to the Iranians.

“The true power of the Islamic regime”… uh yeah… they don’t want to mess with America’s finest. Iran isn’t in the mountains like Afgan and we all ready showed Bagdad and Fulljah what can happen to the low lying targets.

Related articles

• EU Imposes Oil Sanctions (cicerolounge.wordpress.com)
• EU to Embargo Iranian Crude as Tension Mounts (tarpon.wordpress.com)
• EU bans Iranian oil, Tehran responds with threats (business.financialpost.com)
• EU Iran sanctions: Ministers adopt Iran oil imports ban (direcmood.wordpress.com)

The Mental Recession: Albany Police Chief Rips Critics of Occupy Albany ...

The Mental Recession: Albany Police Chief Rips Critics of Occupy Albany ...: Welcome Big Government readers... I'd like to introduce everyone to my new favorite police chief in the entire country, Steven Krokoff...

FINALLY!!! Someone holding a government office speaks out and says what he has to say..... straight to the faces of those who are guilty.

Yeah I know when you're addressing politicians there are certain 'formalities' you're suppose to use. But when those politicians are nothing more than people wanting power and could care less about doing what they swore they would do, then it's time to point a finger in their face and call them out by name. It's time to let the citizens know they do have some people in office, whether elected or appointed, who are not afraid or scared or threatened of losing their jobs who will stand up and call a spade a spade.

Hopefully by Chief Krokoff taking a stand and pointing out the two councilmen (Anton Konev and Lester Freeman) who supported the OWS trash instead of his police officers, there will be some real changes made at the next election. Every seat of government in these United States, from local, to county, to state to the Feds needs a cleaning and the trash needs to be removed.